Why Jack, Arsene & Arsenal Are No Hypocrites

Much has been made of Jack Wilshere's horrible challenge on Birmingham's Nikola Zigic, especially when you consider Arsene's recent crusade against horror challenges in the Premier League following a spate of reckless tackles at the start of this season.

Cries of 'hypocrite!!' can be heard all over the shop (particularly a bunch of buffoons sat on the Goals on Sunday couch yesterday), wagging fingers at Arsene Wenger telling him to practise what he preaches.

They are, of course, all missing the point.

Arsene Wenger accepts that the majority of these reckless tackles are completely devoid of intent, most are mistimed and un-malicious (His comments about Martin Taylor were immediately retracted and apologised for, get that into your head McLeish!), what Wenger is campaigning for is for justice for bad fouls, and justice was had on Saturday.

Both player and manager accepted and apologised for what should, and was consider a 'disgraceful tackle' that has no place in football, there was no bleating about how he's a nice boy who loves his mummy and doesn't have a nasty bone in his body, just complete acceptance for a massive lack of judgement.

And here-in lies the difference between Arsenal and the rest of the Clogging Sunday Leaguers, we accept that fouls and leg breaking tackles can be made, and that certain playing styles will lead to greater possibilities of horror challenges, and we will try to learn from our mistakes.

Jack Wilshere said of his foul, "I just want to say that I mistimed the challenge on Zigic and accept that I deserved to be sent off,"

"I have no complaints about getting the red card and I will learn from this. I`m missing three matches now which I`m really disappointed about, but I just want to say that I deserved the red card."

Now compare that with the comments of Richard Shawcross after his recklessness unfortunately saw Aaron Ramsey's leg almost detached at the ankle.

'It was an accident and these things happen. I'm not going to change the way I play, If I play on Saturday I will play my normal game as I always have done.'

Can you spot the difference?

Two bad challenges, the only difference between the two is that one tackle was fortunate enough not to see a broken leg at the end of it.

Because Jack's challenge could quite easily have ended with the same result.

Yet only one player holds himself accountable for his actions and vows to learn from his mistakes, yet it's astonishing to me that that player isn't the one who's forced a fellow professional to the treatment table for a large chunk of his career.

And this, is what sets Arsene and Arsenal aside from the rest, we understand that accident's don't just happen, they occur because players act irrationally and erratically at times, it happens to the best of them, but those people who recognise their mistakes and learn from them are a cut above the players who refuse to accept responsibilities for the way they play and will continue to put other players at risk because they think sh*t just happens.

Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!

Your Comments (oldest first)

Then don't villify everybody who fouls your players, as your manager has consistently done, alluding to some dark forces at work. Bo//ocks. And I didn't hear M. Vinegar castigate Eboue for his scissor tackle, which 'puts another player's career under threat' according to one M. Vinegar.

And there goes the point ...... flying straight over your head. Wenger has never villifed anyone for making a bad tackle (as I say, the Taylor comment was in the heat of the moment and apologised for) he said Shawcross' tackle was unacceptable, he never question motive or intention, just that the tackle was a very bad one, and if you think he's wrong, then frankly you shouldn't be watching football. People always, always, follow what the media is saying happened or what people have said rather than reading and listening for themselves the actual words that were spoken. Lazy opinions offered by lazy people too preoccupied to bother find out what actually happened.

And why should he comment on Eboue's tackle? It was a perfect challenge. Not a scissor tackle at all. Just a he got the ball and then took the man ..... that's ok for everyone else to do ... why not us?

It was a bad tackle and you're right it could have been a lot worse,but fair play for him and your Manager they could have sugar coated it,but didnt and just said it as it was. Shawcross was an absolute disgrace after he broke Ramseys leg,he is in my opinion a dirty player and Mcleish talk about Pot kettle black...a bunch of hatchett men he has.

You're giving too much away lj - far too familiar with your own medication there - not that it's preventing you from being deluded and paranoid. The thing that strikes me about Wilshere's tackle is that it was very similar to the tackle that Davies made for a ball that Gallas was castigated for in a cup game against Bolton. Davies was off his feet lunging at a ball that Gallas, on his feet, had as much chance of getting as Davies. On that occassion is was the person lunging at the ball who came off worse. They can go either way but Davies didn't take any stick at all for making the same challenge that Wilshere did. The tackling debate is really quite simple. Refs just have to apply the level of tolerance in all games that they applied to us at the weekend.

good article- and very true in what you are saying. bad tackles will happen, its part of the game, as long as they are acted on appropriatly (as wiltshires was). no complaints from wenger or JW. fair play to both of them. its when the likes of de jong brake a leg and do not get punished that it becomes an issue

Notice that deJong has said NOTHING about his tackle re BenArfa and Mancini has backed him to the hilt. The only thing McLeish and the media and Brum fans ever said after the Eduardo tackle was what a wonderful boy Taylor is. Pulis and the media and rival fans ONLY talked about what a lovely boy Shawcross is, and how he didn't mean it. WHY DOESN'T WILSHERE GET THE SAME TREATMENT? The hypocrisy is this: Arsenal player commits a bad tackle or dives, cue hysteria, insults, villification of said player, AW and Arsenal in general. A player dives against/commits a bad tackle against Arsenal: he's not that type of player, it was just an accident, he was just being clever. Anyway, all the haters can relax now because we will not be punished for this. Last season we were punished for Eduardo's dive--we were denied many blatant penalties all season long. Defenders could do whatever they wanted in our penalty box. Refs will no longer grant Chamakh a penalty and we will be subjected to more bookings for fouls because of AW's comments re bad tackles, while opponents are allowed to elbow, shove and kick us at will.

Ramsey a mistake? 2nd time Shawcross has broken someones leg plus numerous of other horror challenges in his short career. His attitude to his poor tackling technique is a disgrace because Pulis and people like you keep telling him its ok to be reckless where as Wenger wont accept its ok.

And spot the difference in class between Pulis & AW: Pulis repeatedly attacked AW in the last few days on a professional & persona level, publicly. Exactly when has AW ever attacked Pulis, McCarthy, Hughes, Allardyce publicly?

CORRECTION: "all the haters can relax now because we will not be punished for this" I meant to say we WILL NOW be punished for this. And lordjohnny, you ask us to be charitable toward the next opponent who hurts one of our players. Have YOU been charitable towards Jack? Will YOU be charitable towards one of our players the next time he makes a badly timed tackle?

Pullis is a sad little inbred runt with a massive inferiority complex and a chip on his shoulder. Who has NEVER won a trophy in his managerial career, maytbe he should of thought about that before slaughtering Wenger for notwinning anything in 6 (actually it's 5 calendar) years.

This is laughable. Everything's so perfect in your A**e-world, and all others are against you for no good reason. Your manager is the epitome of sportsmanship, ditto players, and all others are dirty conniving psychos or cheats. Managers are jealous and disrespectful to your Saint Arsene. The meeja make stuff up and criticise A**e for their own wicked agenda. I'm surprised the club doesn't up sticks and move somewhere else, after all you've done it before. Try the NBA.

Or Stratford perhaps? If this article were a fishing expedition for the very people that it mocks then it's hooked you a few times already lj. Folk like you are born to blunder into anything that's put in front of them.

Still biting then? It's quite clearly mocking those without the capacity to follow a pretty simple proposition (even more so if the solecisms are deliberate) but we'll just have to accept that it would go over some heads - instantly in your case. It's hauled you out of the water a few times and thrown you back in again each time. Maybe you should be looking for another hook to bite onto.

There's gratitude. I'm helping your wretched site get double figures in responses. Surely the half dozen of you get bored talking the same nonsense over and over. Even Sideshow Mel has to answer each poster personally.

"accident's don't just happen, they occur because players act irrationally and erratically at time" - fair point in saying breaks occur when players get frustrated and overreact but I find it hard to believe that the tackler has every intent on breaking a bone. Therefore, in that sense, it is only an accident.

The Sun sells more copies than any other daily. I read somewhere today that Westlife have sold more than U2 and the Stones combined. When I look at 70% of the posts over at VS - on the few occassions I can be bothered - I'm not surprised that you have to measure quality in only in numbers. But wow you were first to post on this thread! You can go back and tell all your spud mates who are apparently impressed with such achievements.

Mind you I suppose you can measure quality in numbers some times. How many titles have we won now? 49 games unbeaten wasn't it? 50 years since the spuds last won a title? Maybe I'm being a bit too dismissive of numbers after all.

Pity you don't have the sense to see that nobody is claiming there is any intent to break any limbs or the sense to see that just because its accidental that there shouldn't be any attempt to reduce the chances of it happening. There probably isn't any other sphere professional or public in which you wouldn't be compelled to take positive action to reduce the risk of injury. Routinely punishing bad tackles and encouraging good tackles is all that is being asked - and that makes far more sense than paranoid and deluded posts obsessed with persecuting those that ask for the application of some simple common sense.

Enough of the pomposity already. It's a contact sport we're talking about, not some H & S initiative. There are sufficient sanctions available to those in judgement, should it be necessary. All the rest is futile gossip, uncorroborated accusations and name-calling, of which your manager is the past master.

Actually, lj, you (like many) forget that Association Football was invented PRECISELY to distinguish itself from rugby - a true contact sport. The sufficient sanctions are not being applied - certainly not consistently. There are no sanctions being applied against willfull, reckless challenges in which players CHOOSE to fly like human missiles at insane speeds (in totally unnecessary area of the pitch, tactically) where they can have no control over their movements, speed, intensity. Not in England, anyway. Shawcross has not been sanctioned at all for his REPEATED assaults on several players by the age of 22 - putting out at least 4 players for long periods, breaking a leg and an ankle. He just goes on his merry way playing with reckless endangerment, totally indifferent to the consequences of his recklessness, and has said that he does not intend to change his way of playing. That's a CHOICE, and it's deliberate. "I will fly into tackles at top speeds like a missile whenever and wherever I choose with absolutely no effort to control my body or how it lands." That's a deliberate choice.

Aaah that same old hackneyed defence. It's a contact sport! Where in the rules of the game does it require that contact is made between two or more of its players? That might be an inevitability of the game but the contact is supposed to be with the ball. The need is for the game to ensure any such contact between players doesn't prevent the game being played. As for uncorroborated accusations and name calling I have yet to see one single post from you that makes even the slightest attempt to justify any objection for requiring the game to be played in accordance with its own rules which do not permit the playing in a manner which can be deemed careless, reckless or uses excessive force. The argument isn't that there aren't sufficient sanctions available it is that they aren't being used as the laws of the game intend. You're just making noise without purpose - they're totally pointless posts.

If you're driving whilst drunk you might not intend to run over that child and kill him, but your actions greatly increased the chances of that happening. If that happens you vow never to drink and drive again, not put down to just being an accident. Now that is an extreme comparison I'm sure, but maybe it get's my point across a little easier for you to understand.

There are sufficient sanctions available to those in judgement, should it be necessary lordjohnny - What a muppet! How many games is De Jong sitting out currently? Pull your head out of your a**e and stop acting like the know it all we know you aren't.

OK Larry, Curly and Mo, football was not invented post rugby, it is a contact sport, and there have always been accidents, injuries and foul play. Disseminating all this is the job of the referee, FA and if need be, as in the case of Gordon Watson, the High Court. If you still think that not sufficient, lobby your MP, chain yourself to your local kebab house until they bring the tumbrils for Shawcross, or go watch basketball. As for the drunk driving analogy...I despair.

Who cares what the 60 year old virgin thinks? He's either being deliberately dense for the wind up, or else he's too stupid to comprehend. Either way, best ignored. Just turn your backs and let the little monkey continue throwing his faeces at the perspex.

On a completely different subject, I was very struck by something AW said in his post-Birmingham press conference. He said that he doesn't believe Diaby has ever fully recovered from his ankle injury and that he still plays with pain. I'm not saying this is some massive revelation, I was just really struck by the way he came out and said it openly and so starkly, esp. the point that Diaby continues to play with pain.

Stands to reason jaelle, when you get a bad injury like that, the muscles around the injury are never quite the same. I've had bad knees for a good few years now and am starting to notice the muscles around it feeling very tight after I play. With an injury like that, it's a bit like smashing a mug and glueing it back together. You can use it again and to all intents and purposes it's fine, but you can always see the line where it's cracked.

I see that LD, I just really hoped (and dreamed) that Diaby was slowly on his way back to putting his injury completely behind him. I just hoped that day would come. Now I see that it's likely it never will. Anyway, I just saw AW's press pre-Shakhtar press conference. Class, pure class. BTW, does anyone here have the link to the recent Eduardo interview where he talks about Arsenal, tackling, etc.?

If you're going to make a political point, you'd better make sure that you're whiter than white otherwise people won't take you seriously. It's a PR disaster, plain and simple. Wenger has rubbed people up the wrong way by implying that he does things differently to others, and the perceptions of him are partly negative because of this. The other side of the coin is that he is forever being praised for being a pioneer. It wasn't a mistimed tackle, it was a bloody dreadful tackle. I think Shawcrosses's comments after the event were extremely ill-thought-through. But to suggest that Wilshire and Arsenal came out of this incident looking 'classy' was absurd. He said what he had to say whether he meant it or not. You don't need to re-cast Arsenal as noble. Everybody knows you're human. It's fine.

"It wasn't a mistimed tackle, it was a bloody dreadful tackle." - you say that only because an Arsenal player did it. With Shawcross, you called it an accident. With any other player who injures an Arsenal player, you call it an accident. If an Arsenal player commits a bad tackle, it's ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS a bloody dreadful malicious tackle. ALWAYS. So stop pretending your opinion is in any way credible or objective and just admit it: when an Arsenal player does it, it's ALWAYS malicious and bloody dreadful. When it's an opponent of ours, it's an accident. Hypocrite.

''If you're going to make a political point, you'd better make sure that you're whiter than white otherwise people won't take you seriously'' - then the best liar wins and we will never have a relevant discussion about anything. Congrats on highlighting the self fulfilling prophecy we live everyday. Heres an idea, how about you study the ISSUE and not the almost cartoon like personifications of the issue?

For those so indoctrinated that you need to be told what the issue is without the BS. Employees are getting their legs broken at work. The call is to ensure all parties are doing everything in their power to prevent this from happening. Now the discussion takes place - as to what can be done if anything to reduce the risk. After the discussion the best solution will be arrived at. Thank you and good night.

I don't think Arsene Wenger should be labelled a hypocrite over this issue, as Arsenal have suffered their fair share of injuries. What I do find slightly hard to stomach is the fact that Wenger jumped on the bandwagon over bad tackles as soon as he saw the opportunity, and his intention as ever was to impress upon referees that Arsenal get kicked out of games frequently, thus gaining an advantage for his own team - and in truth, there is nothing essentially wrong with that, he is merely indulging in mind games. Skillful teams like Arsenal do get kicked around by the likes of Stoke and Blackburn, it's the only way they can hope to compete. But it is quite amusing for those of us looking on to see his entire campaign undone by his own players. So no hypocrisy, jmore a case of egg on face!

“I’m still calling for that; I defend football,” said Wenger. “Whether my players are involved or not doesn’t matter.
“If you look at our record and the number of fouls we have made this season, or look at the Fair Play table in the last five years - you will always find Arsenal in the top two or three. That speaks for the consistency in our behaviour.
“It’s true occasionally we go overboard as well but that does not mean in the longer term our record isn’t fantastic. That is what you have to look at.
Wenger criticised violent tackling in his programme notes for the Birmingham game – only for reporters to use them against him in his post-match press conference. So does the Frenchman find that embarrassing?
“You say to me I should rather shut up?” he responded.
“I believe still that what I said is right. If it concerns one of my players, it’s still the same. We’re here to make sure football is played in the right way.
“I don’t say we’re untouchable and that we don’t make mistakes, because we make them as well." Yeah, sounds like his "campaign" has gone well off the rails.......

The CMO of Fifa has involved himself in the issue, current players are joing the debate, the Dutch national team manager (with some sense of irony) has also got himself involved, other PL managers with the exception of the predictable Luddites agree there's an issue. If anything Wilshere's red card shows that all teams benefit from discouraging bad tackles and encouraging the improvement of tackling skills. West Brom have shown against us and ManU that clogging isn't the most effective tactic to employ against the higher rated sides. Like it or not there is a genuine and necessary debate going on. It just might lead English football into developing more players that are more than just muscular workhorses.

At least we now know that Wenger includes his own team in his analysis of the wrongs in English football. Somehow everyone apart from the people who populate this website got the impression that he felt that teams were setting out to kick his team out of games, and that it was this that led to their serious injuries. At least we can all rest safe in the knowledge that he wasn't trying to cast aspertions on his fellow professionals after-all but rather, he was sensitively attempting to make a point about the game in general, for the benefit of everyone. What a relief to discover that Pulis and Allardyce aren't thugs after-all, but victims of the same forces of moral malaise as Wenger himself.

Pulis and Allardyce and others are still purveyors of the clogging mentality as observed by more people than just Wenger. They are victims though - but victims of their own inability to see what coaches like Di Matteo and Martinez see - that it is possible to defeat the bigger teams and play football at the same time. They haven't yet come to see what it's really all about but just to help them and anyone else with minds open enough here's another non-English perspective: http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/sorry-sam-hard-but-fair-tackles-break-bones-too-2383660.html

Think you're being way over the top here as with the other article on the same subject and this whole "Arsenal vs the other sunday league cloggers" like you're ******** jesus comments are pure arrogance from the most unashamed of fan. The kind of bull you so hate Barcelona for, at least they actually have a successful team. The only thing missing here is any mention of DNA. "This is what sets Arsene & Arsenal aside from the rest" because things dont "fly over your head" unlike us mere mortals tripe. Sorry i try to remain civil & talk football, but that had to be said!

Personally Ice, i'm glad that this has been resolved amicably. I can now see that it was all just a misunderstanding, and that Arsene had everyone's best interests at heart, and that it was nothing to do with Arsenal's percived lack of strength. Maybe Wenger could now lead the way by producing a 'way foward' white paper to remove, as far as is reasonably possible, the kind of bad tackling we saw at The Emirates on Saturday?

Shame you weren't able to do either HY - remain civil or talk football. What is it you object to then? Encouraging good tackling skills? No place for that in your football talk is there? The fact that it isn't just Wenger talking about the need to enforce existing football rules to safeguard the game and its players in the faster, more athletic form of the game played on better and faster pitches? There are many more stakeholders in the future of the game that aren't locked into antediluvian visions of the game? Does your partisan bias really prevent you from seeing that there is some merit in the argument - or remaining civil and talk football?

Both good calls fifthcolumnblue. Coyle did a good job at Burnley and is at least trying to turn Bolton into something different. Holloway is a great example too. It is possible to see beyond the partisan aspects of this issue.

Seriously Amos, of all the put-downs that get used on this site, the one used most often is that the contributor is partisan, and therefore cannot offer an objective opinion!!! No ***** Shirlock, I mean, it's not as if they support different teams is it?! Everyone on here is dyed- in- the- wool partisan. That's why they're always so sure they're correct, and it's also why there's never any real discussion, just hacked-off people shouting at each other about some injustice, percieved or real, and taking feck all interest in anyone else's point of view. Any how, what about this white paper idea?

Partisanship isn't a barrier to rational and objective debate as a few spuds and supporters of other clubs have demonstrated here - and the ongoing debate elsewhere shows. Your inability to divorce the topic from Arsenal and Wenger is what marks you out as someone incapable of separating your partisan bias on a topic which has much wider support and interest. There's plenty of real discussion here - along with the banal, hackneyed worthless contributions that we only ever get from you and one or two others.

I do enjoy annoying your type - lordjohnny Your not half clever enough to annoy me rubber johnny. Just enjoyed pointing out what a complete ***** you made of yourself with your inaccurate and biased observations.

I have to commend Arsenal, Arsene and Jack for their comments in the wake of the red card incident. Unfortunately people remember too many times in the past where Arsene has either wrongly defended a players actions or said "I didn't see it". I can't help but wonder if Arsene's recent comments surrounding bad tackles weren't so fresh in people's minds whether we would have heard the usual comments this time.

We've probably worked this subject to death but....I'd like to understand how AW can be a hypocrite when he clearly said (in one of his first comments re tackling earlier in the season) that all clubs, all managers, all players have a responsibility on this issue, that Arsenal are not exempt, that he and his players also have a responsibility and that they too commit bad fouls. (could someone dig out that quote?) When did he ever say that Arsenal are exempt?

I'm looking at this whole "debate" with a mixture of bemusement and laughter. It's not really a debate at all, is it? Bad tackles should be punished to the full extent of the law is not a particularly divisive or debatable thing to say. The problem is, those with vested interests (you know which managers I mean) seek to obfuscate the issue by clouding it with a heap of irrelevant factors, such as "he's not that type of player" or "we can't ban tackling" or such other nonsense. I can understand why the offending managers do that to a degree because they want to protect something that their style of play hinges on. The media continue to keep the debate circular my misrepresenting quotes and tossing the aforementioned irrelevant factors to keep the fires stoked and, ultimately, keep them in some fresh copy. But it's the people who don't belong to either of those two factions that confuse me the most, a lot of the posters on here. What are you actually being so defensive about? What do you think football stands to lose if it just deploys its own punitive laws a little better? What do you think English football loses if players learn to tackle a little better? It's absolutely nuts when you look at it from a distance.

LD, are you saying that AW didn't have a vested interest in the past when Viera and Petit used their physicality on the pitch as an advantage and therefore he did not criticise/see bad tackling. Yet now Arsenal do not possess such a physical presence he is right to speak out against it?

If you can show me an instance where Vieira and / or Petit was ever given a straight red for a bad tackle, I'd be interested to see it. (Hint, I saw every one of their red cards in person, none of them were straight reds for bad tackles).

Indeed you are right, but I did not mention that they got a red card for a bad tackle. My point is that AW did not comment on bad tackles in the game when Arsenal had a more physical game, so now Arsenal do not possess such a physical presence he is right to speak out against it? This is a vested interest.

Tackles arent always 100% accurate. What lowers the accuracy is when a player is faster than you, has better movement than you or reads the game better than you. You should get faster, improve your movement and reading of the game if you want to compete. You shouldnt just stay exactly the same and keep trying the same tackles because you will foul or injure players. If another team is faster and moving the ball better than you, learn to hold possesion, stop them from being able to move around you so fast by not letting them have the ball. Oh wait both solutions require the people involved to work hard improve and progress. No one wants that. Instead jsut keep smashing players down and watch them all go play in spain.

Independent 23/8/2000. "Usually the physical side of the game in England is great and I love it. It is why I am here. I love the passion. Ninety per cent of the teams play normally but a few managers do not encourage their players to play football," Wenger said. 10/1/200; Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger insisted that Leicester midfielder Robbie Savage should have been sent off for what he believed was a potentially career-threatening tackle on Kanu in a goalless FA Cup fourth round draw at Highbury yesterday. 22/9/1997 Arsene Wenger claimed Dennis Wise should have been sent off before Nigel Winterburn's late strike took Arsenal second in the Premiership. The Arsenal manager was scathing about a two-footed lunge by the midfielder which left Patrick Vieira crumpled on the turf. "The tackle was a very hard and bad one and my first thought was that Patrick would not be able to play any more."

Richard Prokas at Carlisle in 2001 I seem to remember. Vieira was so incensed by the tackle, (which cracked his shinpad clean in two) that when Prokas had the temerity to ask for Vieira's shirt after the game, Vieira flipped the bird at him and threw his shirt into us in the away end.

Arsenal manager Wenger said: "I believe he (Vieira) has to be protected like everybody else. And players who do him on purpose have to be charged like he is charged. It is frustrating. If Patrick does it he will be punished so you should expect that players who do him should be punished. His shin protector is broken high up just below his knee. It was a bad tackle. Everyone says now that to stop Arsenal in midfield you must stop Patrick Vieira and some players get overboard with that. They don't try to stop him within the rules. But it doesn't matter if it is Patrick or a player from Carlisle, every player has to be protected." January 2001.

Arsene also wants financial fair play to be introduced and we all want players to be paid reasonably, I don't think anyone thinks the wages being paid at Citeh are reasonable. With that said Arsenal also have one of the highest wage bills, does that make Wenger a hypocrite. It clearly doesn't. Better tackling for everyone not just Arsenal FC.

Who the fu@ck cares what you were expecting. Come on here and argue your case don't just write BS and state how disappointed you are. Please fu'ck off with that petty BS. I don't know why but comments like the one above really grind my gears, even more so than the THR trolling wind-up ones. There's just something Sun-reading, ignorant ,misled d-head about it. And its also the blatant jealousy of our club unity of support towards our manager. Arsenal fans disagree on a variety of issues. But this issue has been the least polarising on all the blogs.

Was disappointing to see Jack go in for another pretty shocking tackle against Shakhtar and then when he wasn't given the yellow he deserved go in very late again not 2 minutes later. Hopefully Wenger tells him this isn't appropriate and he can work this out of his game.

The point of my comment was to tell you how biased this article was, nothing more. And btw, this is the comments section, and what I wrote above was a comment, fits perfectly. Also can you explain how I am jealous of your club unity toward wenger? It seems you are the one with the BS sir. PS you cared enough to reply.

"Wenger is god, He can do no wrong"...Nobody has had a dig at you but you had a dig at our whole support. It is such an arrogant snithing comment to make. And even worse you don't make any arguments. When I go onto other club's boards I try my best to represent an Arsenal supporter, you obviously don't give a rats arse about representing Chelsea.

First, for all you know, MY personal name could be Chelsea. Second, that first comment was meant to let you know that I think this article is biased, and that that is understandable. That wasnt a dig, just a more creative and less boring way to say "This particular group of Arsenal supporters would never say anything negative about the manager they hold in such a high esteem." This is just a comment, and by that I mean my personal opinion. I am not trying to persuade anyone to change their views, which is what an arguement is.

ChelseaDC, google "Wenger: goalkeeper" do a little perusing of this and many other Arsenal blogs and see if you get universal praise lavished on the manager. It just so happens that on this issue, he's right. Largely because he's not saying anything controversial whatsoever. I share gronedrone's frustration, try deconstructing the points made and tell us why we're wrong then?

If the point of your comment was to tell us how biased the article was Chelsea DC then the point of some of the comments that follow is to tell you how biased your comment was. So that was time well spent then.

ChelseaDC, if you think gooners universally (or even on this site alone) all worship AW you really have no idea what's been going on within goonerdom in the last 5 seasons. I've been one of his biggest (maybe the biggest) critics just on this blog alone recently, tho not the only one. But that's about what happens on the pitch. This is something else entirely. It's one of the few things that 99.9% of all Arsenal blogs and the gooners who post on them agree on.

@Delta: Who says I support Chelsea FC? You just assume so by my name. my username could be my actual name. This article isnt about other editors.
@Dutch: When did I say you guys were wrong on this issue?
my comment was meant to show you how biased this article seems. Nothing more.
@Amos: Good point.
@London: Does that mean you expect articles to be biased and not impartial? Understandable.
@Jaelle: I said this "particular group" meaning this site. Not all gooners.

Your username could be your actual name (orthe team you support and your initials) but then you've also registered and contribute as a member of VitalChelsea. You're free to claim the article is biased but you only do so from the perspective of someone who is partial and biased them self having declined the invitation to say with what point(s) you disagree or to justify your claim that the article or any of the supportive comments asserts the belief that Wenger is a god. Bit of a timewaster really aren't you.

@Amos, like Ive said thrice already, I am not looking for an arguement but was only stating a comment. Apparently, thats not enough and you want me to justify myself. Fine, here is a point in that implies this site is biased. When the writer stated the difference between shawcross's and wilshere's quotes about their respective tackles, he/she says the difference between them was that Wilshere admitted to "learn from his mistakes" while shawcross did not. Yet shawcross didnt say he wouldnt learn, he just said he didnt have to learn anything because bad tackles will always happen in the contact sport we call football. Leg breaking tackles are not always mistakes on part of the tackler, sometimes they are just bad luck. Two examples of the top of my head. The tackles that broke Zamora's and Valencia's legs were both fair tackles that the ref deemed fair. I hope I satisfied your craving for debate. P.S. You must have a lot of free time to be able to waste it replying to a little, old time waster like myself.

It's a bit of amusement DC of Chelsea. Not much of a debate though. You took all that time to come up with a slippery interpretation that Shawcross - having received a red card for an 'accident' as opposed to serious foul play - decided he has nothing to learn. You use that clearly flawed interpretation to justify an accusation of bias by the writer whereas objectively it simply confirms your own obvious bias. As for me spending time here - well its an Arsenal site and I'm an Arsenal supporter on the other hand you're here with no real point to make.

Amos, the bias is that the writer has failed to see what Shawcross meant (or at least failed to grasp his intention before condemning him). I dont know why you quoted accident because I didnt say it was an accident, shawcross got what he deserved, it was a bad tackle. My point was there is nothing to 'learn' as bad tackles will happen no matter how good a defender is at them (im assuming shawcross doesnt do those on purpose). I gave you a point. But instead of countering it, you summarized my post from your point of view. You called it a 'flawed interpretation', but you didnt say why you think that way. Kinda like what I did with my first couple of posts, except I didnt just dismiss the article.

You only need to read Shawcross's quote to know why I described it as an 'accident' - and you say the writer has failed to see what was meant!! There is no point for you to make if you can claim there's nothing for Shawcross to learn from a bad tackle - how about how to make a good tackle? Or the difference between an accident and a bad tackle? If that's your stance your insistence that the article is biased is even more incomprehensible especially as Shawcross has failed to learn from previous bad tackles. The contrast made in the article between Shawcross's attitude to a bad tackle and Wilshere's is magnified by your failure to read the quotes (hence flawed interpretation) and follow the simple logic. Then again maybe your bias simply prevents you from doing so.

Oh, excuse me, I didnt notice the word accident in the quote. That actually doesnt matter to my point as I thought it was a horrible challenge anyways. You (or Rocky7?) say he (shawcross and other tacklers I assume) needs to learn from bad tackles, I say bad tackles happen to even the best, regardless of their previous experience (and as long as theyre not on purpose). I also add that ***** DOES happen. Did the players who tackled Valencia and Zamora (who made fair tackles but ended in unfortunate leg breaks) have to be accountable for their actions if they did nothing illegal? Everything we're arguing about is a matter of opinion. Lets be honest for a second, I wont change your mind and you wont change mine, so Ill be the first to offer a stalemate. Agree to disagree? or would you like to continue?

There's little point in continuing. You've failed to show any bias in the article and your contention that it isn't possible for anyone to learn to improve their tackling so there's no point trying is so obviously silly it makes it all a bit of a waste of time. I am happy enough in the knowledge that anyone reading your posts objectively will see the bias and the flaws clearly enough to conclude you're wrong so we'll leave it at that.

Thats exceedingly stupid CDC. The facts are - you are a chav called ChelseaDC and then when people assume that you are a chav you say they shouldn't jump to conclusions? Logic is definitely not your strong suit.

Cookie Policy
At Vital Football, we along with most other modern websites use small files called 'cookies' to create the most secure, effective and functional website possible for our users. Without these files our business model, based on advertising, breaks down and we would be unable to continue to provide the services that you are here to utilise. By continuing to use this website after seeing this message, you consent to our use of cookies on this device unless you have disabled them. For full details please read our Cookie Policy which can be found here. However, if you would like to disable cookies on this device, please view our Cookie Policy which contains an opt-out tool for disabling advertising cookies. Please also visit our information pages on 'How to manage cookies' if you would also like to block all other types of cookies. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies.